-22

Read through the following scenario to see why I think being able to chat with the reviewing users of an issue is crucial:

Scenario

A question I posted recently (this one) was closed for needing to be more focused.

The only hint I got is "Update the question so it focuses on one problem only." Since I have no way to talk to whomever closed this and left me the message, I can only guess. Alright, I added a paragraph stating my main goal.

Submitted for reopening.

Got a denial saying "Original close reason(s) were not resolved". Like, how am I supposed to figure out what to do? I now just left him a message via "Flag". Not sure if this is what one is supposed to do, but there's not really any other options.

Seems to me like this could've been resolved with way less hassle and more timely on both ends if I would just be able to talk to whoever is closing the issue. Because it's very apparent that close voting users and me have different viewpoints here, which I cannot really resolve, since for me, it's abundantly clear that posting my problems listed there separately would be completely pointless.

Maybe I should've called the problems "points of contention" or "faults" instead? I have no idea, and I cannot talk to the reviewing users to find out if that would've been fine...

15
  • 8
    Just FYI: "moderators" were not involved. What we call moderators here are users that are elected in community elections, and have a diamond shape next to their usernames, on a label that says "Mod". The question you link was closed by regular users such as yourself (albeit with more reputation).
    – yivi
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:21
  • Fair point. Just think of every place where i wrote "mods" as "reviewing users" instead.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:22
  • 1
    I have a better idea: just edit your question. But I'd probably spend some time reading on how closure and reopening works around here in any case.
    – yivi
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:22
  • 19
    Your question is not on topic and I don't see how you can make it on topic. It is simply dealing with a whole range of problems and design choices. Focusing on one problem means focusing on very specific narrow coding problem.
    – Dalija Prasnikar Mod
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:23
  • @DalijaPrasnikar "I don't see how you can make it on topic" i mean, i guess me too. But that is kind of the whole issue, isn't it? And this kind of furthers my point here; Being able to talk to the reviewer(s) would probably help me to entangle it and be able to post several separate issues.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:26
  • 4
    Design questions are also off topic for Stack Overflow. Inherently they are not a coding problems as in you have some piece of code and it does not behave or work as expected and you need to change that code. Design questions will always be too broad or opinion based for Stack Overflow.
    – Dalija Prasnikar Mod
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:40
  • I'm not sure what exactly your expectations are. People voted to close the question because it is unsuitable, not because it can be made suitable. There are very obviously several problems, so there is not really much to say why it was closed. Making it suitable seems like a massive amount of work and I'm not sure why the onus would be on the close voters.
    – user5349916
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:42
  • "not because it can be made suitable" I can accept that. But then the message i got was wrong and all effort trying to fix it are for naught.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:43
  • @wlfbck I don't think it was wrong - the question might well be possible to make suitable. Frankly, it looks like cutting it down to one problem could work. But that it not inherently the close voters' responsibility.
    – user5349916
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:49
  • @MisterMiyagi I would be delighted about any suggestion on how to cut it down over there ;) "But that is not inherently the close voters' responsibility" Thinking a bit about it, maybe asking the specific close voters is indeed not good. But being able to directly ask for feedback on the issue itself instead of having to rely on posting to meta (which i just learned is a thing. After reading here for nearly 10 years). And then anyone who feels like it can make suggestions.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:56
  • 1
    My 2cts: Qt is indeed "way too broad" and "out-of-scope" (= "Off-Topic" in SO-Terminology), but OP put a lot of Effort in a Quality Post/Qt, and someone among the "Closers" could have posted some little Comment explaining that (and what possible Options OP could have), instead of just an anonymous "Qt Closed: Needs to be more focused"... (Not a single Comment in the whole Qt/Thread...) // (I wished Users in "my" Tag posted such High Quality Qt's to be honest, woaw...!)
    – chivracq
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 9:04
  • 1
    @chivracq Appreciated, and yeah i spent about 2 and a half hours writing it, trying to get the details in there without drifting off. Getting closed without having any opportunity to learn / improve the post then kind of sucks.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 11:02
  • Hence my making this topic, because i feel like something is very "off" in the process here. Like a step missing.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 11:10
  • 7
    No thanks. I don't want my time wasted explaining every closure, getting into street-fights and being labelled 'racist', 'misogynist', 'transphobic' etc etc. There are too many malicious, vindictive liars to engage in chat over votes. Sorry, but that's the way the world is and you cannot have that nice thing.
    – Martin James
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 11:43
  • @MartinJames hence my improved suggestion: "hinking a bit about it, maybe asking the specific close voters is indeed not good. But being able to directly ask for feedback on the issue itself instead of having to rely on posting to meta (which i just learned is a thing. After reading here for nearly 10 years). And then anyone who feels like it can make suggestions."
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 11:52

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
13

It was closed by members of the community, not a mod. The close reason is quite clear; your question needs to be more focused, and ask only one question. In its current form, it's way too broad and asks too much. You unambiguously present five separate problems. You need to edit your question to ask a single problem. Once that is solved and you have more, ask a new question (or make multiple question posts at once if the rest of your questions don't hinge on prior answers).

However, conceptual architecture/design questions are still off topic for SO. I'll direct you to read the whole excerpt for it directs conceptual questions for that tag belong to Software Engineering instead of Stack Overflow. Considering that is a somewhat long excerpt, and the relevant information was cut off at the end of the box, it's understandable you may not have noticed it.

6
  • 1
    Thanks for the pointer to software engineering, i wasn't sure if should post it there or not. I didn't even know the tags had their own page, and unfortunately the short summary when asking questions ends the description for ddd at "Note that..." so i could not see the part about software engineering :-/
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:38
  • That one is a bit of a long excerpt, I'll agree there.
    – codewario
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:48
  • 1
    @wlfbck consider giving a read to design review questions guidance at their meta. Also consider that five separate problems would be considered too broad over there same way as at SO, see eg What goes on Software Engineering (previously known as Programmers)? A guide for Stack Overflow
    – gnat
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 8:38
  • @gnat Thank you very much for the links! I will start reading asap.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 11:00
  • @gnat Would a question like "Is it good design to reference an entity from another entity by an ID value object?" be appropriate on SE? I'm asking because during research i found a lot of questions regarding DDD and how to do this and that on SO. And also that one seems the easiest to "pull out" of my currently closed question :D
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 11:31
  • @wlfbck hard to tell from such a brief description, I think it would be safer to discuss this in SE.SE chat where site regulars may give more detailed advice
    – gnat
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 11:35
18

Moderators do not generally resolve disputed closures. Question closure and reopening is handled by regular users.

And you never need to contact the specific user(s) who voted to close your question; all you need to do is convince 3 other users that your question should be re-opened. (Technically, the user(s) who voted to close your question originally could be among the users who vote to re-open it. Often, they are, especially if you respond to the feedback quickly and they are still monitoring the post. But they don't have to be the same people; the system is inherently designed to give you a second opinion in the reopen review queue. In this case, none of the "remain closed" voters were the same users who voted to close in the first place, so you got the opinions of 6 different users, all voting against this question, as posted, being suitable for Stack Overflow. I doubt you would be able to convince them otherwise, even if the system did allow you to contact/argue with them directly.)

As for your specific question, it is textbook "too broad", meaning that it is insufficiently focused for a Q&A site. The specific recommendation that you got in the blue "closed" box is this:

Update the question so it focuses on one problem only. This will help others answer the question.

That applies directly, without requiring any mental gymnastics. You are asking, by your own admission, about "a combination of problems", which isn't going to work in a narrowly-focused Q&A model. Updating your question to draw out five different problems is not addressing the original issue that led to its closure (the question is too broad, contains too many questions in one, and needs to be more focused). The closure was correct, and so was the refusal to re-open.

Related reading:

21
  • Like i already responded to the other guy: This is exactly why i think being able to chat to all the reviewers would be incredibly helpful. They only say "hey entangle this" and i can just say to the void "but how?". So it's not helpful. And the point of a Q&A site is to be helpful, isn't it? Also, sure i can delete all but one problem so it fits the definition "Update the question so it focuses on one problem only. " - but we both know the result: people would ask for more context and would just point out the other problems.
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:34
  • 15
    No, the purpose of a Q&A site is not to be helpful. That's the purpose of a help desk. We are not a help desk. The purpose of a Q&A is to build a library of high-quality answers to specific, focused programming questions. If questions don't meet our requirements and/or aren't on-topic, as strict as those expectations are, then we don't accept them and we don't offer any help. This isn't a chat room. The system is intentionally designed to avoid placing any focus on users; all focus is on content.
    – Cody Gray Mod
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:39
  • 1
    @wlfbck Cody is correct. Engaging with the community about whether your question should have been closed is one use case that Meta is for. Ask; and ye shall receive (an answer, at least)
    – codewario
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:42
  • That's just a different type of being helpful though... "If questions..." thats fine. But you do realize that it would make it easier to acquire such high-quality answers, if issues like this could be talked about, right?
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:42
  • 1
    @wlfbck SO is a Q&A site, not a forum of discussion. Again, that's what the Meta sites are for. Asking here was the correct course of action to clarify why your question was closed.
    – codewario
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:45
  • @BendertheGreatest Just for my understanding: If i don't get why my issue was closed, i'm supposed to make a post here and ask why, is that correct?
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:47
  • @BendertheGreatest "SO is a Q&A site, not a forum of discussion" i get that. I guess you, me and cody have just very different opinions on how to get more Q&A which is helpful ;)
    – wlfbck
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:47
  • 3
    You're trying to have a discussion; that's not Q&A. Yes, getting good questions is an essential part of Q&A, and people are happy to help improve questions in various ways (this is why we encourage editing, for example). But anything that requires a back-and-forth dialogue is not supposed to happen on the main site. (It can happen on Meta, if necessary, although you posed this as a feature request, rather than a support request, so that's a bit different thing.) Anyway, as noted, it isn't necessary or even necessarily a good idea to try to talk to the original close-voters.
    – Cody Gray Mod
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:49
  • @wlfbck If you have questions about a closure, yes. Comments on the post might work too but you'll get more eyes on it here.
    – codewario
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 7:50
  • 9
    If I might nitpick your phrasing, you say "the purpose of a Q&A site is not to be helpful." That's not quite right: the purpose is not to be helpful to the asker specifically, but to be helpful primarily to other people who may later have the same question.
    – Ryan M Mod
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 8:19
  • 6
    Being helpful is not the goal, it is an indirect consequence, @Ryan. "The purpose of a Q&A site is not to be helpful" is different from "The purpose of a Q&A site is to be not helpful". Isn't English fun?
    – Cody Gray Mod
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 8:43
  • 2
    "The primary purpose is to build a repository of questions and answers. By its very nature, of course, that is going to help people, and that is the rationale behind creating the site... but it is not the rationale behind using it..." (source)
    – gnat
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 10:00
  • 3
    We do not need more Q&A, @wlfbck, we need better Q&A. We already get more than 5000 questions per day - there cannot be as much handholding as you propose.
    – 0Valt
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 13:08
  • 2
    @wlfbck that "separate discussion page" place exists just fine - you are expected to ask on this site with "specific-question" tag - whether you want to get reasoning behind closure or figure out how to improve the question. Note that bar is similar to main site so - discussing closure of the question linked from this one will not get warm welcome - "Closure message said to ask one question per post so I edited the post to ask 5 distinct questions" is not an ideal way to start the conversation.
    – Alexei Levenkov
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 18:46
  • 1
    @wlfbck bing.com/search?q=discuss+stackoverflow+question+closure points to help stackoverflow.com/help/closed-questions which points to stackoverflow.com/help/reopen-questions with "If you're simply unsure about the validity of the closure, the best place to ask is on the community's meta site." guidance (you can start with site's help directly or use any search engine except Amazon/Disney to get to those articles). If you have suggestions how to make it more discoverable consider posting as complete feature-request.
    – Alexei Levenkov
    Commented May 6, 2022 at 23:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .